Robert’s blog (1.0)

Despite some clever spin to the contrary, any one who has looked objectively at so-called "piracy" is usually surprised to find that it doesn't have the devestating economic effects they expect.

I've been saying for a long time that "piracy" doesn't really represent lost sales, because most of the people who "pirate" would just go without if they lacked the opportunity. Another thought occurred to me today in the Napster/Gnutella realm, however.

Now, please don't take anything I say here to mean I endorse copyright violations. I'm not a big fan of copyright (or any other so-called "intellectual property") law, but I still recognize it as the law. Heck, I've paid for things that are legally available for free.

What music is most traded online? The top forty stuff and the rare, hard-to-find stuff. (Well, that's what I remember. I can't seem to track down a source presently.)

In the first case (which I believe is the larger one), the music has already made an obscene amount of money. In the second case, the music isn't making any money anyway, because the people who want it can't find it.

No, it doesn't make it any more lawful, but it is another explaination for why the RIAA has to distort the truth to "prove" that online music swapping is hurting CD sales.

For anyone who doesn't have kids, who plans to have kids, and who dreads diaper duty; I have a message:

Diapers aren't so bad. In fact, diapers are quite wonderful things.

Potty training is what you should fear.

First, let me say that I greatly enjoyed The Fellowship of the Ring. I thought nearly every omission and modification from the book was reasonable and justifiable.

Yes, I judge these films in relation to the book. If you want a film to be judged solely on its own merits, don't make an adaption of a book.

The Two Towers is a good movie. The parts that come from Tolkien's book, however, are better than the parts that don't. So, I can't help but think that it might have been a great movie, had the filmmakers been a bit truer to the book.

The best thing about this movie--despite my post-Jar Jar reservations--was the depiction of Gollum/Smeagol. Indeed, I felt an empathy for this Gollum--an intensity of emotion that I could truly relate to--that I never got from the character in the book. I still believe it would have been better for him to look more realistic, but the performance didn't suffer for it.

Today marks the third time in my life to be "laid off". In each case I've been told things like:

• "This is no reflection on your performance."
• "We (the executive team) made a bad decision."
• "It's a reflection on the executive team/the board."
• "We've been nothing but happy with the work you've done."

Hey, here's a crazy idea. Hold on to your hat...

Instead of "laying off" people who are performing and doing good work, why don't you fire the people responsible for the company's problems? Maybe, CEO/founder/board member, if you're considering "laying off" good employees because you've made mistakes, you should instead consider replacing yourself.

I've heard people say they didn't vote because they didn't like the Republican or the Democratic candidate. I've also heard people say they didn't vote because they were annoyed by the amount of negative advertising from both sides.

Now, I have no problem with people choosing not to vote, but I don't think these are good reasons not to vote. Voting for a minor party or independant candidate is a great way to tell the Republicans and the Democrats that you aren't happy with either of them. If the number of votes cast for such candidates exceeds the margin of victory, you can be sure both the major parties will be very interested in learning why they didn't earn those votes. They can't, however, see you as a lost vote, if you don't vote at all.

The National Organization for Women has released their 2002 Feminist Primetime Report. This report assesses primetime television on...

• ABC
• CBS
• FOX
• NBC
• UPN
• WB

...in these four areas:

• Gender Composition and Diversity
• Violence
• Sexual Exploitation
• Social Responsibility

After looking at the data--despite the rhetoric in this report trying to convince me otherwise--I have to say that primetime network TV is doing a pretty good job. Forty percent of the shows got a A or B. Only 5 shows out of 100+ got an F. There are four times as many A shows as F shows.

A NOW representative was on the 29 October 2002 edition of the Jeff Ward show on KLBJ-AM. One show that came up in the conversation a lot was The Bachelor, which got an F.

I would not mind at all if my daughter watched The Bachelor, because it provides something very important: Negative rolemodels. It shows women doing foolish things and looking foolish doing them. A positive rolemodel can show you what you should do, but just as important (maybe more important) is learning what you should not do.

I don't suppose NOW would ever adjust their study for such considerations.

I'm not a "intellectual property" lawyer, so I'm probably going to bungle some of the details below...

A company called Tolkien Enterprises licenses:

• The film and stage rights to The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings.
• The trademark and service mark rights of the names and likenesses of characters, places, things, and events from those books.

All other rights to Tolkien's writings belong to the Tolkien Estate.

For Peter Jackson to make his movies, New Line Cinema had to get a license from Tolkien Enterprises. Because Tolkien Enterprises only holds the rights to The Hobbit and The Lord of the Rings, Jackson's films cannot legally draw upon The Silmarillion or any of Tolkien's other writings in order to make the films truer to Tolkien's vision.

The same problem plagues the Lord of the Rings Roleplaying Game from Decipher. Some people are harshly criticizing the game for contradicting The Silmarillion and some of Tolkien's letters. Decipher responds that they didn't have the legal right to consider those sources.

This is lunacy.

I'll certainly agree that no one should have the right to present Tolkien's (or any other author's) work as their own. Beyond that, however, all these "rights" are nonsense.

We're not talking about keeping people from exploiting Tolkien's fame for their own profit. People can do that without obtaining any rights or license.

If someone wants to create and publish a roleplaying game inspired by Tolkien's works, they should have every right to do so. They shouldn't have to get permission from anyone. If Tolkien and his heirs didn't want his works to inspire others, they shouldn't have published them.

Why should Tolkien Enterprises, the Tolkien Estate, Tolkien's heirs, or anyone else profit from the work of someone else? Tolkien didn't pay royalties to those who inspired him. If these entities want profits, they should create and publish something original themselves, rather than licensing the rights to be inspired.

Please, can we stop trying to guilt everyone into voting?

The great thing about this country (in theory) is that we're free. That means that we're free to ignore politics if we want to. Yes, you & I may find it incredibly sad that someone wouldn't exercise this awesome power, but it isn't our place to guilt them into voting. Besides...

I do not want people voting who aren't informed. In fact, I explicitly do not vote in any race if I am uninformed about it. Voting without being informed is simply irresponsible.

More importantly, we need to learn to care about the local races. So many of us--and I've been guilty of this myself--focus only on the national or statewide race(s), and know nothing about the local races. It's easy to do, since even our local TV news seems to focus on the bigger races instead of the smaller ones. The local races, however, have a bigger impact on your daily life. Plus, since the constituency is smaller, your vote counts for more in a local race.

When you go to cast your ballot, the foremost thing in your mind shouldn't be the presidential race or the federal senatorial race or even the gubernatorial race. It should be the county commissioner, the city council seat, the school board seat. Think about your state representative before you think about your governor. Think about your federal representative before you think about your federal senator or the president. Cast your informed vote in those races first. Then go back and cast the ceremonial vote for the presidential candidate who is going to lose your state, or the gubernatorial candidate whose bombast and carpet-bombing negative ad campaign belies the power of the position he seeks.

Here is one editorial that was featured on Google News calling for someone else to take over the D.C. area shooter investigation. Also featured on Google News were some letters to the editor criticizing Moose and the law enforcement agencies involved. I'm sure there are plenty of others.

Are these people really so ignorant as to think that, just because they aren't being informed, that the investigation is going nowhere? Does anyone really believe that if the police have information that is important for the public to know that they'll keep it to themselves? Does anyone really believe that the local and federal law enforcement aren't all working together to do everything they can do to solve this case?

With the recent news that North Korea, in violation of a 1994 agreement, has an active nuclear weapon program; many have asked: Why does the US seem to be treating Iraq and North Korea differently?

The answer is simple: They are different.

To me, this quote from a BBC News article says it best:

Since [January], North Korea has shown interest in renewing the dialogue with the US and has also made progress in improving relations with Japan and South Korea.

Whether you agree with how the Bush administration is handling either, Iraq and North Korea are vastly different countries in vastly different situations. Different situations call for different actions.